I have no doubt that it is the best interests of the children for the parents to improve their communication, especially with respect to matters affecting the children. However, on my reading of Greef v. McIntosh there appears to have been some positive indication to the court that communications between the parties were expected to improve. At para. 53 Madam Justice Sinclair Prowse said: While recognizing that there were communication problems, the trial judge clearly concluded (and there was evidentiary basis for doing so) that the parents were capable of overcoming this difficulty if they chose to do so. In any event, given the damage that it probably would do to their daughter if they did not overcome it, the trial judge considered that they had to resolve it. As was mentioned earlier, he also provided them with the time and some possible mechanisms for accomplishing that end.
Counsel also cites Olusanya v. Olusanya (25 July, 1997) Vancouver D088339 (B.C.S.C.) where Mr. Justice Ralph made an order for joint custody despite evidence of animosity between the parents. He was of the view that despite the animosity between the parties, an order for joint custody was in the child's best interests.
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexsei.com.